Friday, January 15, 2016

Kelley Lynch's Emails to Leonard Cohen's Lawyers & Alan Hootnick Re: the Ongoing Criminal Harassment

From: Kelley Lynch <>
Date: Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:30 AM
Subject: Re:
To: alan hootnick <>, Michelle Rice <>, Robert Kory <>
Cc: "*irs. commissioner" <*>, Washington Field <>, ASKDOJ <>, ": Division, Criminal" <>, "Doug.Davis" <>, Dennis <>, MollyHale <>, fsb <>, rbyucaipa <>, khuvane <>, blourd <>, Robert MacMillan <>, a <>, wennermedia <>, Mick Brown <>, "glenn.greenwald" <>, Harriet Ryan <>, "hailey.branson" <>, Stan Garnett <>, Mike Feuer <>, "mayor.garcetti" <>, Opla-pd-los-occ <>, "Kelly.Sopko" <>, Whistleblower <>, Attacheottawa <>,, Fabian Paulmikell A <>

Kory & Rice,

If you would like to discuss the Tax Court case, 9th Circuit appeal, or my RICO suit, please do so directly with any of those courts.  In the meantime, this conduct should cease and desist.

Kelley Lynch

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Kelley Lynch <> wrote:

Alan Hootnick,

Would you like to explain why my Criminal Stalker continues to copy you on harassing emails where he argues and defends Leonard Cohen's legal positions?  This particular email relates to the recent Tax Court order.  While the criminal stalker, Stephen Gianelli, has not formally entered an appearance in any Cohen-related matter, he is most definitely an unofficial member of his legal team.  I understand the "ticket to tax court" issue and will address that with the 9th Circuit.  Gianelli has attempted to interfere with the Tax Court matter and that is the reason he contacted Mr. Fabian, IRS Chief Trial Counsel's office.  I submitted evidence to Tax Court that the ongoing scheme involves a campaign of harassment and terrorism that has been directed not only at me but my sons, family members, friends, Paulette Brandt, and witnesses.

Gianelli has no idea what my "supplemental filing" was and this is nothing other than his attempt to obtain information.  This criminal has not made anything clear to me other than his intent to obstruct justice, intimidate witnesses, and defend Leonard Cohen's legal positions while attempting to infiltrate the Spector case.  He is now attempting to "dissuade" me from filing my RICO suit against Cohen, et al.  Cohen stole from me.  The evidence he has attempted to destroy, conceal, etc. proves that fact.

The criminal operative is out of his mind, dangerously unstable, and his copying you on these harassing communications is deeply disturbing.

Kelley Lynch

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Stephen Gianelli <>
Date: Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 8:19 AM
Cc: alan hootnick <>

This order sets forth many of the reasons I emailed to you before the motion was decided as to why the tax court lacks jurisdiction over your petition, including much of the authority relied on by the court (including the case mentioning that a notice of determination is the taxpayer's "ticket to the tax court".

The order also reiterates a point I made to you early on - that since the court lacks jurisdiction over your petition, it has no ability (or desire) to consider your many  ‎collateral allegations about all of the "harassment" you have "suffered". (Lawyers call this kind of collateral argument "bootstrapping" - and it is not permitted and (obviously) not successful. 

This was underscored yet again when - on January 5, 2016 - the tax court struck your supplemental filing dated December 29, 2015, a filing that once again tried to inject collateral matters into the record - including your alleged "harassment". 

Finally, it is made clear in the attached order of dismissal that your many filings completely ignored the only issue that was before the court: how does the tax court - a court of limited jurisdiction with no general equity powers - have jurisdiction over your petition in view of the fact that the IRS never transmitted to Kelley Lynch a notice of determination , let alone within 90 days of the filing of your 2015 petition. 

That is one of your main failings in court. Kelley Lynch wants to talk about the issues that SHE deems important, and not the issues that the laws enacted by the legislature as viewed by judges and lawyers (who know a lot more than Kelley Lynch about the law) identify as the central issues to be addressed in the case. 

Unless you can re-read the attached order, and not only understand it but see where your analysis went wrong, you have no hope of ever succeeding in a court of law. 

Because the issues of jurisdiction on which the motion to dismiss your tax court petition turned were simple, basic, and straightforward. 

In contrast, the thick underbrush of thorny issues, procedural issues that have grown around the entrance to federal district court since the termination of your business relationship with Leonard Cohen in September of 2004 (11+ years) are myriad, complex, and would be a daunting task for even a highly experienced and extremely talented trial attorney to navigate. Let alone someone like Kelley Lynch who cannot even grasp the concept of no notice of determination = no jurisdiction. 

As I have demonstrated to you by citing the statutes and rules (and by transmitting to you recent, sample orders), because you will be asking the Central District for a fee waiver, a magistrate judge will review your complaint as soon as you request permission to file it without a fee for facial merit and rule compliance. 

The first hurdle you will encounter is the requirement that your complaint consist of a plain and simple statement of your claims. This is because - based on your past filings - you have a compulsive desire to include a prolix factual narrative with every pleading you file. You simply must "tell your story" - the whole story - under the mistaken belief that anyone who hears all of the "facts" will see the case your way. So your complaint will be many hundreds of pages long and will reference scores of documents. You will literally include all of your evidentiary facts, and thereby violate federal pleading rules, including those prohibiting prolix filings. 

Next, the allegations of conspiracy upon which your RICO suit is constructed will be short on the kind of critical detail (date, place of illegal agreement, persons present, words stated) will be lacking in PLAUSIBILITY and therefore subject to dismissal. 

It will also be clear to the reviewing magistrate that many of your complaints arise from your dissatisfaction with prior criminal and civil proceedings adjudicated  ‎in state court, and that your filing violates the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine as well as principles of res judicata. This includes your protestations of innocence notwithstanding your 2012 criminal conviction and your cliams that Lenoard Cohen owes you money (and/or "stole from you") notwistanding the May 25, 2006 judgment to the contrary (that YOU owe Cohen money, and he owes you nothing) and two unseccessful motions by you in 2013 and in 2015 to set that judgment aside. 

It will also be readily apparent to the magistrate judge reviewing your fee waiver application that much of what you complain about consists of absolutely privileged litigation ‎conduct. 

The court will also observe that your claims appear to be outside the applicable 4-year RICO statute of limitations. 

For all of these reasons, the magistrate judge is going to DENY your fee waiver request, is going to DISMISS your complaint by checking that box on the Central District form order I previously emailed to you, and it will do so LONG BEFORE Leonard Cohen is required to file a responsive pleading. 

Therefore, you will not even force Cohen to respond to your allegations. 

The case will be over before Cohen even knows you sued him! 

Think about that.
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE network.